Which of course our government already isn't doing.
One body that emits 310K blackbody radiation and is legally entitled to be here -- one check for $X. Simple.
You're copying-and-pasting of your previous answer does not address the fact that under this scenario, people in high cost states will still get less value from a prebate than people in lower cost states.
The alternative -- X is taxed, Y isn't, Z is, etc ad nauseam -- would invite a circus of fraud ...
Except for the fact that this "fraud-prone" system works just fine for the states which impose sales tax. If this was so "fraud-prone" then states would not be using sales tax as a revenue stream.
Household with one person, one check. Household with two people, two checks. Household with three people, three checks. What part of this pattern eludes you? I think even the government can get that more or less right.
That's not how the FairTax works. It offers a different prebates for varying family configurations.
Why are you living in a high-cost state if you can't support yourself there?
Who are you to question the living decisions of private citizens? Why do you think the government is in the right to punish people based on their living decisions? Besides, if everyone moved to low cost states, those states would become more expensive to live in.
Obviously, your suggested maze of deductions is far more vulnerable to that problem (e.g. if the government doesn't approve of your food choices, those foods get taxed).
And again, your prebate punishes me when I choose to not participate in a certain government policy and the goverment threatens to yank my money from me for doing so. At least under my proposal, I get to keep my money before I have to go begging to the government for a prebate check.